On 2022-04-28 18:49, Guoqing Jiang wrote:
I can't agree with you anymore. I would say some patches were submittedI'm not sure where we disagree here. I certainly don't want to introduce
without run enough tests, then after one by one kernel release, the thing
becomes worse.
regressions myself. I haven't submitted v3 yet because I've become less
certain that there are no regressions in it. The point of my last email
was try to explain that I am taking testing seriously.
This is also the reason that I recommend run mdadm tests since md raidWhile I'd certainly like to run mdadm tests, they appear to be very
is a complex subsystem, perhaps a simple change could cause regression.
And considering there are really limited developers and reviewers in the
community, the chance to cause regression get bigger.
broken to me. Too broken for me to fix all of it -- I don't have time
for fixing that many issues.
Seems I'm not the only one to run into this problem recently:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-raid/20220111130635.00001478@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
And it's a shame nobody could even bother to remove the unsupported 0.9
metadata tests from the repo as a result of this conversation.
If I may, is it possible to submit your tests to mdadm as well? So we canI'd certainly consider that if I could run the test suite. Though one
have one common place to contain enough tests.
hitch is that I've found I need to run my tests repeatedly, for hours,
before hitting some rare bugs. Running the tests only once is much
easier to pass. It's hard to fully test things like this with so many
rare retry paths in a simple regression test.